When Biting Your Tongue Comes Back to Bite You: Having Difficult Conversations at Work

I’ve coached more than a few leaders who have avoided difficult conversations at work because they are worrked about how a team member might respond. Often, they knew something wasn’t working. They noticed it, were frustrated by it, and may even have changed how they worked with that person because of it. But they didn’t actually talk to them about it.

And I get why. Sometimes, biting your tongue feels like the right leadership move. A team member does something that frustrates you, their work isn’t quite meeting expectations, their communication style is creating tension, or they miss something you thought should have been obvious.

Maybe it doesn’t feel significant enough to address. Maybe you don’t want to make a big deal out of it or you’re worried about how they’ll react. Or maybe having the conversation just feels uncomfortable, so you let it go.

Sometimes, that’s exactly the right call. Good leadership doesn’t mean addressing every irritation or imperfection. But there’s an important difference between intentionally letting something go and avoiding a conversation you probably need to have.

What happens when we avoid Difficult conversations at work?

The issue usually doesn’t disappear. Instead, the leader starts compensating for it. They double-check the person’s work, take something back rather than delegating it, become more cautious about what they assign, or simply become increasingly frustrated.

Meanwhile, the employee may have absolutely no idea there’s a problem. From their perspective, everything might be fine because nobody has told them otherwise.

Eventually, something that could have been a relatively straightforward conversation becomes much bigger. By the time the issue is finally addressed, the leader may be carrying weeks or months of frustration, while the employee is surprised because they thought everything was going well.

That’s where biting your tongue can come back to bite you.

## What are you assuming about the conversation?

When I work with leaders who are reluctant to have these conversations, I’m often interested in what they believe will happen if they speak up. They might worry that the person will take it personally, that they’ll damage the relationship, or that they’ll come across as overly critical. Sometimes they convince themselves it’s easier to work around the issue or simply do something themselves.

There can also be an assumption that the other person should already know. But if an expectation hasn’t been communicated, we have to be careful about holding someone accountable to something they may not realize we expect of them.

Those concerns are understandable, but I also like to challenge leaders to examine the assumptions on the other side: What might happen if you don’t have the conversation?

What happens to the quality of the work or your ability to delegate? What happens to the relationship as your frustration builds? And what does this look like six months from now if nothing changes?

Perhaps most importantly, are you actually giving this person a fair opportunity to understand what you need from them and adjust?

---

Difficult doesn’t have to mean confrontational

I think we sometimes make these conversations harder because we imagine them as confrontations. They don’t have to be. A healthy leadership conversation can be curious, specific and direct without being adversarial.

Rather than storing up frustration until you eventually have to say, “This keeps happening and it needs to stop,” you can address something earlier: “I’ve noticed this has happened a couple of times, and I wanted to talk about it before it becomes a bigger issue.”

Then get curious. What happened from their perspective? Were your expectations clear? Is there context you’re missing? Do they need more support, information or clarity? Is this actually a performance issue, or is there a disconnect in how the two of you are working together?

You don’t have to enter the conversation knowing exactly what the problem is or how to solve it. Part of the value of the conversation is learning more about what’s actually going on.

Healthy conversations are part of healthy teams

One shift I encourage leaders to make is to stop thinking about difficult conversations as evidence that something has gone wrong. The ability to talk about things that aren’t working is actually part of what makes a working relationship healthy.

Teams need to be able to clarify expectations, disagree, give feedback, acknowledge mistakes and adjust. Leaders play an important role in creating an environment where those conversations can happen productively.

That doesn’t mean saying everything that crosses your mind or turning every issue into a performance conversation. It means becoming more intentional about recognizing the difference between “I’m choosing to let this go” and “I’m avoiding this because I don’t want to have an uncomfortable conversation.”

Those are very different leadership decisions. And sometimes, the conversation you’re most tempted to avoid is exactly the one that can prevent a much harder conversation later.